searching for non turbo, non cvt, newish vehicle

I get where you are coming from. There was a day when I said I’d never own a VW or a turbo’d vehicle. Certainly not both!

Then, I drove one.
I just hope the turbos are better these days. Last one I had was from 1985 and it died a few times. Engines were cheaper back then and I remember being able to drop in a used one for around $600. After the 3rd engine blew a head gasket, I got a different car.
 
I have been up grading turbo chargers since Buick when we used a choke cable to adjust the the boost. Lol

Wolf you simply are posting only what you think you find as accurate information. I leave it at that.
FaiLed..... lol
 
I have been up grading turbo chargers since Buick when we used a choke cable to adjust the the boost. Lol

Wolf you simply are posting only what you think you find as accurate information. I leave it at that.
FaiLed..... lol
I am posting only about a particular situation. I think you have failed to understand that and labeled it inaccurate. It is not inaccurate for that situation and I didn't imply that it applied to everything. I'm sorry you failed to appreciate the difference between an observation and a general statement of fact that applied to everything. There's a difference. I'll let everyone else decide.
 
If you can stomach the looks of the Sonata, it's a really nice car.

Isn't Nissan getting rid of their CVTs soon?
 
Isn't Nissan getting rid of their CVTs soon?
Not really, but they finally realized that they should not put a CVT at least in their high-end SUV lineup, as it hurts the brand image and "ruggedness" of the vehicle. Finally they put ZF 9 speed to the new gen and the car rides/feels much better in every way. I really doubt they will do the same to Rogue or smaller entries.
 
Not really, but they finally realized that they should not put a CVT at least in their high-end SUV lineup, as it hurts the brand image and "ruggedness" of the vehicle. Finally they put ZF 9 speed to the new gen and the car rides/feels much better in every way. I really doubt they will do the same to Rogue or smaller entries.
Nissan was taking of Epower ing everything back in 2015 no less

Still haven’t seen one come over
 
OP,
2011-2015 Mazda5.
AT, 2.5 L NA engine.
It is a mini-minivan
Or a mazda3 with a bigger body.
The footprint is like a medium sized car.
Gas mileage is not great in town.

Change the 17" wheels to 15" mazda3 wheels. (Or do a search, someone posted in a thread of mine on Tires/wheels with a Big list of possible matches based on bolt pattern)
 
OP,
2011-2015 Mazda5.
AT, 2.5 L NA engine.
It is a mini-minivan
Or a mazda3 with a bigger body.
The footprint is like a medium sized car.
Gas mileage is not great in town.

Change the 17" wheels to 15" mazda3 wheels. (Or do a search, someone posted in a thread of mine on Tires/wheels with a Big list of possible matches based on bolt pattern)
thanks pandus, but a mazda5 would be long out of cpo warranty i imagine.

as for a non turbo mbenz...i had a c280 and a glk350, both cpo and well liked. in 2008 i was returning overseas and passed the c280 to my older pilot son, who enjoyed it on the wide open roads of nm and tx, and then traded it for a cpo c250. i put 40k miles on my 2012-14 glk350, which then needed about $2200 worth of “b” service & tires. in between the the two benz after returning to the u.s. was a 2010 toyota rav4 4cyl that i had for three months and 10k miles of road tripping, creakiest p.o.s. ever. i had enough of the glk350 and traded for my cpo passat s. new mbenz cpo warranty is just one year (unlimited mileage is meaningless), too chintzy.

so, it’s looking like i will focus on a toyota camry or maybe avalon, mazda cx5 or 6, or kia nonturbo sonata, sportage or maybe sorento... nonturbo acura rdx may be ok except for its timing belt? toyota highlander seems too boatish ime. thanks again folks.
 
i had enough of the glk350 and traded for my cpo passat s. new mbenz cpo warranty is just one year (unlimited mileage is meaningless), too chintzy.
Mercedes CPO warranty is one year, but you can buy an extra 2 years for a total of 3 years. It also picks up when the factory warranty expires so it's possible to get 4 years worth of warranty if there's still a year left of the new car warranty, normally it's 4 years/50k.
 
which then needed about $2200 worth of “b” service & tires.
Tires I can understand, but "B" service is an oil change. I just don't get it.
Now if you are talking trans service and brake fluid flush, I can justify that.

"B" pops up every other year. Do you really think that justifies the cost?
 
Tires I can understand, but "B" service is an oil change. I just don't get it.
Now if you are talking trans service and brake fluid flush, I can justify that.

"B" pops up every other year. Do you really think that justifies the cost?
There's other things that are part of B service that aren't included. Typically spark plugs and transmission fluid changes. Normally B service is another $500 or so and then they tack on the other $300-$600 for plugs/transmission fluid. That's why it's usually cheaper to get a 2 or 3 service pack when the plugs or transmission fluid is due. Sometimes you get plugs at 60k and then fluid at 70k but the average price of a 2 pack is probably a little over 1k.
 
Whenever this topic comes up I think about this. What if the OP finds a vehicle that meets all their needs, fits them perfectly but has a turbo or cvt or GDI motor or whatever? Is that really going to be a deal killer?

Would you settle for less of a car or a less comfortable car in order to avoid these things?
 
Whenever this topic comes up I think about this. What if the OP finds a vehicle that meets all their needs, fits them perfectly but has a turbo or cvt or GDI motor or whatever? Is that really going to be a deal killer?

Would you settle for less of a car or a less comfortable car in order to avoid these things?
I think when people dig their heels in in some preconceived bias, any evidence provided to the contrary will just result in the backfire effect, and they'll dig their heels in even more...

If "reliability to 100K" is the driving factor, there's no reason to avoid a modern turbo engine, but I'm certainly not going to bother trying to convince the OP of that fact.

This seems like an easy decision: get a CX-5 or a Mazda 6 if one is sedan-included. The Mazda 6 sedans is one of the nicest, best value sedans out there in that category, and it checks all of the boxes. The CX-5 is great as well. And they're both engaging to drive.
 
This seems like an easy decision: get a CX-5 or a Mazda 6 if one is sedan-included. The Mazda 6 sedans is one of the nicest, best value sedans out there in that category, and it checks all of the boxes. The CX-5 is great as well. And they're both engaging to drive.


Yep that’s a good example. In both cases the OP might find one in the color they like and everything ticks the boxes but open the hood and it’s a SkyActiv Turbo.
 
This thread reminds of myself a year ago . . . I was looking for a non-turbo, no-CVT, no-GDI, no-cylinder deactivation(not the deal breaker for this one) and lastly no stop & go. Basically I was looking for a boring old school 5-6 speed AT.

When I saw a 2020 Tucson with $9,000 off MSRP, I was sold although it's a GDI. Oh well, it's going to last 100,000 miles with diligent maintenance, no problem.
 
Not really, but they finally realized that they should not put a CVT at least in their high-end SUV lineup, as it hurts the brand image and "ruggedness" of the vehicle. Finally they put ZF 9 speed to the new gen and the car rides/feels much better in every way. I really doubt they will do the same to Rogue or smaller entries.
ZF9? The CVT might be more reliable.
 
Back
Top